Rethinking Marxism

A Journal of Economics, Culture & Society

ISSN: 0893-5696 (Print) 1475-8059 (Online) Journal homepage: [Link]/journals/rrmx20

The Southern Question and Subaltern Social

Groups and Classes

Jordan T. Camp

To cite this article: Jordan T. Camp (2025) The Southern Question and Subaltern Social Groups
and Classes, Rethinking Marxism, 37:2, 170-178, DOI: 10.1080/08935696.2025.2475870

To link to this article: [Link]

Published online: 08 Jul 2025.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 189

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

[Link]
RETHINKING MARXISM, 2025
Vol. 37, No. 2, 170–178, [Link]

The Southern Question and Subaltern

Social Groups and Classes

Jordan T. Camp

This essay reflects on Antonio Gramsci’s Subaltern Social Groups: A Critical Edition
of Prison Notebook 25 (Columbia University Press, 2021), edited and translated by the
late Joseph A. Buttigieg and Marcus E. Green. While Gramsci’s concept of subaltern
groups has long inspired scholars of cultural studies, geography, subaltern studies, and
political theory, this work has drawn on a relatively small selection of Gramsci’s
prison writings. This first complete English translation of Gramsci’s writings on
subaltern groups and classes represents a major turning point in Gramscian studies,
showing how Gramsci provided important “methodological criteria” for analyzing race
and class in specific conjunctures. Gramsci’s insights about subaltern groups and
classes as well as the southern question can be “translated” to confront the current
conjuncture.

Key Words: Antonio Gramsci, Political Theory, Subaltern Groups and Classes,
Translation

In late 1934 and early 1935 Italian Marxist theorist Antonio Gramsci developed new
notes examining the history of subaltern groups and classes. He did so in poor
health and under twenty-four-hour police surveillance while confined to the
Cusumano clinic in Formia. This new notebook was distinct from others he
had written while incarcerated in a fascist prison in Turi di Bari, where he had
been confined between 1929 and 1933. As indicated on its first page, this notebook
had been printed in “Ditta Cugiini Rossi—Rome” (Gramsci 2021, 1). This special
notebook, alongside all his writings that make up the prison notebooks, explores
a period marked by the rise of fascism and outlines a method with which to com­
prehend it. Gramsci was interested in how the defeat of the working-class move­
ment was related to its failure to win the allegiances of the peasants of the south
(Rudé 1980, 9), who were depicted by members of the social elite in the north as
“barbaric” and “pathological.” Gramsci titled this notebook, “On the Margins of
History: The History of Subaltern Groups” (Q25, §1; Gramsci 2021, 3).1

1. I follow the lead of Gramsci scholars in citing references to his prison notebooks by notebook
number (Q), note number (§), and page number from the source consulted.

© 2025 Association for Economic and Social Analysis

 Subaltern Social Groups 171

Gramsci used this “special” notebook to develop his concept of “subaltern” or

subordinate groups and classes. He observes that “often, subaltern groups are
originally of a different race (different religion and different culture) than the
dominant groups” (Q25, §4; Gramsci 2021, 9). He uses the notebook to theorize
the struggles of slaves, peasants, common people, and the proletariat, as well as
the articulation between race and class, religion, and “common sense.” In addi­
tion, he notes how women’s history is “similar to the question of the subaltern
groups,” and that “‘masculinism’ can be compared to class domination.” In
doing so, he elaborates a central “research criterion” for understanding the elite
construction of subaltern groups and classes as pathological (Q25, §4; Gramsci
2021, 9). For Gramsci, a rethinking of the criminalization of subaltern groups
and classes was critical to the struggle against fascism.
Gramsci’s writings on subaltern social groups have recently been edited and
translated by the late Joseph A. Buttigieg and Marcus E. Green (2021) and pub­
lished as Subaltern Social Groups: A Critical Edition of Prison Notebook 25. This impor­
tant volume is the first complete English translation of the entirety of Gramsci’s
writings on subaltern social groups, work that has long been relevant for scholars
of race and class, critical geography, social history, subaltern studies, and political
and social theory. It includes the English translation of notebook 25 as well as pre­
viously unavailable or partially translated related materials.
The book represents one of the final works of Joseph Buttigieg, one of the most
original and generative Gramscian scholars of his generation. He was William
R. Kennan Professor of English at the University of Notre Dame, translator and
editor of the complete edition of Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks published by Colum­
bia University Press, and also a founding member and president of the Interna­
tional Gramsci Society (Gramsci 1992, 1996, 1997). Throughout his distinguished
career, Buttigieg (2017) illustrated Gramsci’s relevance for understanding the chal­
lenges of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. As he argued, Gramsci is a “non-
dogmatic, alternative democratic thinker for our times.”
Subaltern Social Groups features an introduction by co-editor Marcus E. Green,
the political theorist, former editor of Rethinking Marxism, and International
Gramsci Society secretary, who had long worked with Buttigieg and labored to
complete the volume in the wake of his passing. Green’s introduction carefully
demonstrates the centrality of the concept of subaltern groups to Gramsci’s ana­
lysis of race and class, religion, the southern question, and common sense or contra­
dictory conceptions of the world. It shows how Gramsci conceived subaltern groups
as a “category of analysis” to understand material conditions and politics. In doing
so, it provides readers with a distinct assessment of his political-theoretical insights
about subaltern groups and classes (Green 2021, xxxvii).
While Gramsci wrote extensively about subaltern groups, Green (2021 xxii) ob­
serves, “There has been relatively little critical engagement with his integral texts,
contributing to distortions.” These distortions include the idea that Gramsci did
not write about race and racism directly. Conversely, the publication of Subaltern
172 Camp

Social Groups demonstrates that Gramsci wrote very clearly about the articulation
of race and class. In turn, this newly translated work shows how he developed a
distinct method for understanding how race and class shaped the consciousness
and autonomous political mobilizations of subaltern social groups and classes.
In doing so, it demonstrates how Gramsci provided important “methodological
criteria” for analyzing race and class in specific historical and geographical con­
junctures (Q25, §2; Gramsci 2021, 6; Hart 2002, 27).
In this notebook, Gramsci argues that these methodological criteria could be
understood with precision through a concrete analysis of growing popular con­
cerns over race and “criminality” in Italy during the early twentieth century
(Q25, §8; Gramsci 2021, 14). He explains how presiding notions of criminality
had been shaped by University of Turin criminologist Cesare Lombroso, who
had depicted southern Italy as an “inferior civilization,” one that was marked
by a “criminality of blood.” These theories circulated in scholarship as well as
in Avantil!, the Italian Socialist Party publication. Lombroso influenced the emer­
gent Italian school of criminology, whose key followers were socialists. These
criminologists, as Peter D’Agostino (2002, 323, 320) notes, “linked racial inferiority
to southern Italian culture.” Their racist theories purported to distinguish a “race”
of criminals; notions that were influential in American criminology as well. Fur­
thermore, as Avery Gordon (2011) demonstrates, extensive experiments utilizing
Lombroso’s theories were conducted on prisoners in the United States.
Lombroso’s racist constructions of the Italian South were an important refer­
ence for Gramsci in his theorization of the “southern question” (D’Agostino
2002, 323; Gramsci 2000). Gramsci had long been aware of the conceits in the
field of criminology, having studied philology at the University of Turin, where
Lombroso had been a member of the faculty. Gramsci’s attention to popular con­
cerns over race and criminality and the “southern question” developed alongside
the rise of fascism as a mass movement and state form. In 1926, Gramsci penned
his important unfinished essay, “Some Aspects of the Southern Question.” It
argues that bourgeois ideology had depicted the peasantry of the Italian South
as “biologically inferior,” that their situation was not the result of capitalist devel­
opment, but rather because they were “lazy,” “criminal,” and “barbaric.” At the
same time, it showed how these racist constructions justified the uneven develop­
ment of capitalism in southern and northern Italy, as well as imperialism in Africa.
In doing so, it argues for the necessity of building worker and peasant alliances in
the struggle against racism, capitalism, and Italian fascism (Gramsci 2000, 173;
Kipfer and Mallik 2022; Heatherton 2022, 94–5).

Historical-Geographical Context

While incarcerated in a fascist prison, Gramsci elaborated the thesis he developed

in “the Southern Question” from a more “disinterested view,” as he described it.
 Subaltern Social Groups 173

His writing on the “southern question” represented a shift from his journalism to
his more focused conjunctural analysis in the Prison Notebooks (Gramsci 1994a, 83;
Buttigieg 1992, 21–2; Green 2021, xxxi). There he deployed the method of conjunc­
tural analysis in order to theorize fascism as a solution to a crisis of hegemony that
rocked Italy after World War I (Said 1994; Antonini 2021, 150).
In notebook 4 included in Subaltern Social Groups, Gramsci elaborates his “meth­
odological criteria” for conjunctural analysis (Q4, §38; Gramsci 2021, 36–47). For
Gramsci, the study of decisive conjunctural moments enables one to analyze
the connections between shifts in the economy and political and ideological pro­
cesses. Conjunctural analysis involves an examination of the “relations of force” at
“various levels,” which include the economic, political, and military forces within
a society. The “relation of military forces” is key (Q4, §38; Gramsci 2021, 40). It in­
cludes both a technical military dimension, and what Gramsci terms the “politico-
military,” which he defines as “a form of political action that has the virtue of pro­
voking repercussions of a military character” (Q4, §38; Gramsci 2021, 40). The po­
litico-military is a crucial dimension for comprehending the distinct political form
of fascism in his time, and its resurgence in our own (Camp and Greenburg 2020;
Camp and Heatherton 2023).
In elaborating this research criterion, Gramsci warned about fascism’s “popular
appeal” (Hart 2013, 303). His conjunctural analysis revealed that certain elements
of this political situation were relatively permanent, such as the role of the military
and police in crushing opposition. Yet he noted that other factors fluctuate
rapidly, such as the popular consent to the regime. In this way, Gramsci argued
that the forces of opposition should consider the hegemonic processes that
shape the common sense and political organization among subaltern groups
and classes, as well as the long-term structural forces that shape what is possible
in a specific conjuncture (Q4, §38; Gramsci 2021, 37).
Gramsci’s conjunctural analysis enabled him to render vivid the “specific case of
political crisis” or “crisis of hegemony” that led Italy to become one of the paradig­
matic fascist state forms in the twentieth century (Poulantzas 1974, 60). In note­
book 25, Gramsci suggests how popular narratives about race and criminality
legitimated the formation of this particular state form. He was concerned with
how the modern state replaced the “mechanical bloc” of social groups with the
production of consent to the “hegemony of the ruling and dominant group.” In
turn, Gramsci suggests how this state form “abolishes certain autonomies” in
the process. Significantly, he also shows these autonomous struggles “will be
reborn in other forms, as parties, trade unions, cultural associations” (Q25, §4;
Gramsci 2021, 9). He concludes by suggesting that “the dictatorships of our time
abolish these new forms of autonomy” and work to “incorporate them into the ac­
tivity of the state” as the “dominant class becomes totalitarian” (Q25, §4; Gramsci
2021, 9–10). In this way, Gramsci demonstrates how the hegemony of the ruling
class was linked to the expansion of policing and surveillance to contain opposi­
tion (Antonini 2021, 169).
174 Camp

In his observations about the surveillance of subaltern social groups, Gramsci

reworks insights from his notes on the state and civil society showing that
Italian fascism was “more a police than a military system” (Q13, §27; Gramsci
1971, 222). He understood the political purpose of the police beyond simply ensur­
ing “the repression of crime.” He theorized the police as an expression of the “to­
tality of forces organized by the State and by private individuals to safeguard the
political and economic domination of the ruling class” (Q13, §27; Gramsci 1971, 221).
His conception of fascism as a police system was critical to the development of his
theorization of the state. In doing so, he showed how the fascist regime sought to
resolve an “organic crisis” of hegemony through the expansion of police, military,
and bureaucratic control over “civil society” (Antonini 2021, 166).
This conception of the state was a decisive intervention in a conjuncture where
most political and social theorists defined the state as a “political society,” or
simply a kind of coercive apparatus. In place of these theories, Gramsci offered
an alternative theory of the “integral state,” which he defined as a “balance”
between “political” and “civil” society. This work revealed how political theories
of the state as ideal types fell short in theorizing the precise form the state took
in fascist Italy. As Gramsci (1994b, 67) observed, they specifically neglected the
ways in which fascism combined a bureaucratic regime of military, prisons, and
police with allegedly “private” organizations in civil society such as churches,
schools, and unions. As Gramsci argued, the “full significance” of his theory of
subalternity and the integral state can only be grasped through concrete analyses
of particular conjunctures (Q4, §38; Gramsci 2021, 37, 40; Green 2021, xlvi; Thomas
2018, 3, 9–11).2
New work in Gramscian studies has drawn attention to the significance of the
Italian philological scholarship for interpreting Gramsci’s texts as well the politics
of the period. This scholarship provides the historical-geographical context re­
quired to understand Gramsci’s political thought in his time, and our own (Ives
2004; Brennan 2006; Thomas 2009; Loftus 2019). As Buttigieg has pointed out in
his important 1994 essay on “Philology and Politics,” Gramsci’s attention to the
self-organization of the subaltern classes represented a distinct alternative to
most “communist political theories and practices.” Gramsci was especially con­
cerned about the dogmatic reduction of Marxist theory in the wake of the Stalinist
turn in the Communist Party in the mid-1920s. According to Buttigieg, Gramsci
thought that it would lead to “catastrophes, causing great damage that can
never be repaired.” In Gramsci’s view, this dogmatism would lead to a “rift”
between socialist intellectuals and leaders and the masses of people. As an alter­
native, Gramsci argued for the development of a “collective organism,” one that
joined principled political-theoretical work with the self-organized struggles of

2. For an elaboration of Gramsci’s theory of the integral state, see, e.g., Thomas (2009, 93–5, 137–
41), and Levenson (2022, 162–79).
 Subaltern Social Groups 175

subaltern groups and classes through a “living philology” (Buttigieg 1994, 122, 136,
137).
“The continuing significance of Gramsci for our time,” Buttigieg argues, “can
only be made manifest by those meticulous philologists,” who can help readers
understand how he transformed defeat into new ways of theorizing politics (But­
tigieg 1994, 138). Inspired by these insights, Gramscian scholars have emphasized
the philological method required to understand Gramsci’s theory in the post–
World War I conjuncture, suggesting a need to “translate” his insights to under­
stand the specificities of our own much different conjuncture (Kipfer 2002; Kipfer
and Hart 2013; Hart 2020; Kipfer and Mallick 2022; Camp 2022). Taking up this
challenge, I want to conclude by suggesting that his insights about the history
of subaltern groups and classes can be translated to confront the specific problems
of the current conjuncture. Gramsci provides criteria for analyzing the historically
and geographically specific relationship between the resurgence of neo-fascist po­
litical organizations and their “anti-immigrant common sense” and a crisis of U.S.
hegemony and for global capitalism (Broder 2023; Silver and Payne 2020).

The Current Conjuncture

In the current conjuncture, “neofascist common sense” combines antipathy to

“globalist elites” and the “deep state” with dedication to nationalism, law and
order, and the criminalization of subaltern groups and classes including migrants,
the unemployed, the homeless, and LGBTQI communities, which are, of course,
not mutually exclusive categories.3 This neofascist common sense has been critical
to shoring up consent to an authoritarian program promoted by figures on the far
right such as Giorgia Meloni in Italy, Marine Le Pen in France, Viktor Orbán in
Hungary, Donald Trump in the United States, and beyond. Within an extremely
nationalist and exclusionary framework, their putative opposition to “globalism”
has attracted popular support (Broder 2023, 5, 13, 14).
While it may be tempting to interpret this neo-fascist common sense as part of
an unbroken chain of racist nationalism under capitalism, we gain a deeper un­
derstanding through a conjunctural analysis. Gramsci’s interventions derived
their explanatory power from a specific conjuncture, but their implications are
not fixed to his time and place (Camp and Heatherton 2023). His methods devel­
oped in fascist Italy during the 1920s and 1930s remain relevant in places as diverse
as Brazil, India, Italy, the United States, and South Africa in the 2020s. They
suggest the political stakes in moving between philological readings of Gramsci
and translating his insights about the history of subaltern groups and classes to
meet the distinct challenges of the current conjuncture (Hart 2024). They illustrate
that authoritarian resolutions are never inevitable (Denning 2021; Kipfer and Hart

3. On “neofascist common sense,” see the interview with Paul Gilroy in Wade (2020).
176 Camp

2013), but are rather the product of political struggles where, as Gramsci put it,
“various outcomes are possible” (Q4, §38; Gramsci 2021, 41).
It is therefore important to remember Gramsci’s “open-ended” conception of
politics. He demonstrates that politics is the product of the “relations of forces”
operating in a specific historical moment and geographical context (Hall 1988,
169). In this way, the challenge is to remain committed to Gramsci’s method,
which provides a “shield against all forms of dogmatism” (Buttigieg 1990, 81).
This is particularly important in the present, when subaltern groups and classes
are recruited for different political projects with antagonistic interests. As
Gramsci warned, subaltern groups are “always subject to the initiatives of domi­
nant groups even when they rebel and rise up; only ‘permanent’ victory breaks
their subordination, but not immediately” (Q25, §2; Gramsci 2021, 6).
It is our great fortune that scholars can now engage with Subaltern Social Groups
in translating Gramsci’s understandings in the present. In the wake of the COVID-
19 pandemic, the worst economic crisis since the 1930s, and the resurgence of the
far right, it illustrates how to analyze the ways common sense might shape the
self-organized struggles of subaltern classes. It also suggests the failure to investi­
gate these dynamics will have deleterious consequences. As Gramsci warned, eco­
nomic crises produce not only spontaneous protests among subaltern classes, but
also “conspiracies among the reactionary groups” who seize the moment to
“attempt coups d’état,” as was clear in the 6 January 2021 siege on the United
States capitol that was self-consciously replicated in the Brazilian capitol on 8
January 2023 (Q3, §48; Gramsci 1971, 199). This situation suggests how fascist na­
tionalisms “mediate” crises of capitalism in different places and, in doing so,
produce “bizarre combinations” (Kipfer and Hart 2013, 337; Q3, §48; Gramsci
1971, 200). In this context, as Gramsci put it, “every trace of autonomous initiative
by subaltern groups, then, should be of inestimable value to the integral historian”
(Q25, §2; Gramsci 2021, 7).

References

Antonini, F. 2021. Caesarism and Bonapartism in Gramsci: Hegemony and the Crisis of Modernity.
Chicago: Haymarket.
Brennan, T. 2006. Wars of Position: The Cultural Politics of the Left and Right. New York:
Columbia University Press.
Broder, D. 2023. Mussolini’s Grandchildren: Fascism in Contemporary Italy. London: Pluto.
Buttigieg, J. A. 1990. “Gramsci’s Method.” boundary 2 17 (2): 60–81.
. 1992. Introduction to Prison Notebooks, vol. 1., by A. Gramsci, ed. J. A. Buttigieg.
New York: Columbia University Press.
. 1994. “Philology and Politics: Returning to the Text of Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks.”
boundary 2 21 (2): 98–138.
. 2017. “Joseph Buttigieg en el Seminario Gramsci, Universidad Nacional de
Columbia.” Facebook, 13 November. [Link]
259611431231553/?vh=e&extid=MSG-UNK-UNK-UNK-COM_GK0T-GK1C.
 Subaltern Social Groups 177

Camp, J. T. 2022. “Gramsci and Geography.” In Oxford Bibliographies in Geography, ed. B.

Warf. New York: Oxford University Press.
Camp, J. T., and J. Greenburg. 2020. “Counterinsurgency Reexamined: Racism, Capitalism,
and U.S. Military Doctrine.” Antipode 52 (2): 430–51.
Camp, J. T., and C. Heatherton. 2023. “Riots in the Master’s Hall: Racism, Nationalism, and
the Crisis of U.S. Hegemony.” In Racism, Violence, Crime, and Media, ed. M. Bhatia, S.
Poynting, and W. Tufail, 225–43. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Denning, M. 2021. “Everyone a Legislator.” New Left Review 129 (May–June): 29–44.
D’Agostino, P. 2002. “Craniums, Criminals, and the ‘Cursed Race’: Italian Anthropology in
American Racial Thought, 1861–1924.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 44 (2):
319–43.
Gordon, A. F. 2011. “‘I’m Already in a Sort of Tomb’: A Reply to Philip Scheffner’s The
Halfmoon Files.” South Atlantic Quarterly 110 (1): 121–54.
Gramsci, A. 1971. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. New York: International Publishers.
. 1992. Prison Notebooks. Vol. 1. Ed. J. A. Buttigieg. New York: Columbia University
Press.
. 1994a. Letters from Prison. Vol. 1. Trans. R. Rosenthal, ed. Frank Rosengarten.
New York: Columbia University Press.
. 1994b. Letters from Prison. Vol. 2. Trans. R. Rosenthal, ed. F. Rosengarten. New York:
Columbia University Press.
. 1996. Prison Notebooks. Vol. 2. Ed. J. A. Buttigieg. New York: Columbia University
Press.
. 1997. Prison Notebooks. Vol. 3. Ed. J. A. Buttigieg. New York: Columbia University
Press.
. 2000. “Some Aspects of the Southern Question.” In The Antonio Gramsci Reader:
Selected Writings 1916–1935, ed. D. Forgacs, 171–85. New York: New York University Press.
. 2021. Subaltern Social Groups: A Critical Edition of Prison Notebook 25. Ed. and trans. J.
A. Buttigieg and M. E. Green. New York: Columbia University Press.
Green, M. E. 2021. Introduction to Subaltern Social Groups: A Critical Edition of Prison Notebook
25, by A. Gramsci, ed. and trans. J. A. Buttigieg and M. E. Green, xxi–li. New York:
Columbia University Press.
Hall, S. 1988. The Hard Road to Renewal: Thatcherism and the Crisis of the Left. London: Verso.
Hart, G. 2002. Disabling Globalization: Places of Power in Post-Apartheid South Africa. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
. 2013. “Gramsci, Geography, and the Language of Populism.” In Gramsci: Space,
Nature, Politics, ed. M. Ekers, G. Hart, S. Kipfer, and A. Loftus, 301–20. Malden, Mass.:
Wiley Blackwell.
. 2020. “Why Did It Take so Long? Trump-Bannonism in a Global Conjunctural
Frame.” Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 102 (3): 1–28.
. 2024. “Modalities of Conjunctural Analysis: ‘Seeing the Present Differently’
through Global Lenses.” Antipode 56 (1): 135–64.
Heatherton, C. 2022. Arise! Global Radicalism in the Era of the Mexican Revolution. Oakland:
University of California Press.
Ives, P. 2004. Language and Hegemony in Gramsci. London: Pluto.
Kipfer, S. 2002. “Urbanization, Everyday Life and the Survival of Capitalism: Lefebvre,
Gramsci and the Problematic of Hegemony.” Capitalism Nature Socialism 13 (2): 117–49.
Kipfer, S., and G. Hart, 2013. “Translating Gramsci in the Current Conjuncture.” In Gramsci:
Space, Nature, Politics, ed. M. Ekers, G. Hart, S. Kipfer, and A. Loftus, 321–43. Malden,
Mass.: Wiley Blackwell.
178 Camp

Kipfer, S. A., and A. Mallik. 2022. “‘Stretch’ and ‘Translate’: Gramscian Lineages, Fanonist
Convergences in the (Post)Colony.” Historical Materialism 30 (4): 137–73.
Levenson, Z. 2022. Delivery as Dispossession: Land Occupation and Eviction in the Postpartheid
City. New York: Oxford University Press.
Loftus, A. 2019. “Gramsci as Historical Geographical Materialist.” In Revisiting Gramsci’s
Notebooks, ed. F. Antonini, A. Bernstein, L. Fusaro, and R. Jackson, 9–22. Leiden: Brill.
Poulantzas, N. 1974. Fascism and Dictatorship: The Third International and the Problem of
Fascism. London: New Left.
Rudé, R. 1980. Ideology and Popular Protest. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
Said, E. 1994. Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage.
Silver, B. J., and C. Payne. 2020. “Crises of World Hegemony and the Speeding Up of Social
History.” In Hegemony and World Order: Reimagining Power in World Politics, ed. P.
Dutkiewicz, T. Casier, and J. A. Scholte, 17–31. New York: Routledge.
Thomas, P. D. 2009. The Gramscian Moment: Philosophy, Hegemony and Marxism. Chicago:
Haymarket.
. 2018. “Refiguring the Subaltern.” Political Theory 46 (6): 1–24.
Wade, F. 2020. “Whiteness Just Ain’t Worth What It Used to Be: A Conversation with Paul
Gilroy.” Nation, 28 October. [Link]
interview.